New Jersey Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection v. Stewart Title Guaranty Company (A-44-09)8-2-10
No agency relationship existed between the title
company and the attorney who misappropriated the
clients’ funds at the time the misappropriation
occurred; the title company is not liable for the
misappropriation.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
IMO David J. Witherspoon (D-157-08)
IMO David J. Witherspoon (D-157-08)7-29-10
For his unethical conduct in this matter and his
history of discipline, David J. Witherspoon, is
suspended from the practice of law for a period of one
year and until he complies with conditions by the
Court.
For his unethical conduct in this matter and his
history of discipline, David J. Witherspoon, is
suspended from the practice of law for a period of one
year and until he complies with conditions by the
Court.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
VAN HORN V. VAN HORN A-6553-06T3
VAN HORN V. VAN HORN A-6553-06T3 07-23-10
We reversed an order disqualifying counsel over her
client's objection for violating Rule 5:3-5(b) by taking a postjudgment
mortgage on her client's real estate while her
representation of her client continued during the time for
appeal by virtue of Rule 1:11-3. We held that disqualification
of counsel was not an available remedy for a violation of Rule
5:3-5(b). At most, the Family Part judge could have invalidated
the transaction. We did not require same because the direct
appeal has been decided and the evil sought to be prevented by
Rule 5:3-5(b) no longer exists.
We reversed an order disqualifying counsel over her
client's objection for violating Rule 5:3-5(b) by taking a postjudgment
mortgage on her client's real estate while her
representation of her client continued during the time for
appeal by virtue of Rule 1:11-3. We held that disqualification
of counsel was not an available remedy for a violation of Rule
5:3-5(b). At most, the Family Part judge could have invalidated
the transaction. We did not require same because the direct
appeal has been decided and the evil sought to be prevented by
Rule 5:3-5(b) no longer exists.
CBS OUTDOOR, INC. V. BOROUGH OF LEBANON PLANNING (A-3479-08T2)
CBS OUTDOOR, INC. V. BOROUGH OF LEBANON PLANNING BOARD/BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A-3479-08T2 07-22-10
This action in lieu of prerogative writs involves outdoor
advertising media. We provisionally remand the development
application to the local land use agency for further
proceedings. The opinion addresses several recurring land use
issues, including conditional use variances, the time of
decision rule, and the "turn square corners" doctrine.
This action in lieu of prerogative writs involves outdoor
advertising media. We provisionally remand the development
application to the local land use agency for further
proceedings. The opinion addresses several recurring land use
issues, including conditional use variances, the time of
decision rule, and the "turn square corners" doctrine.
Hubner v. Spring Valley Equestrian Center (A-52-09)
Gloria Hubner and Michael Hubner v. Spring Valley Equestrian Center (A-52-09)7-28-10
The Equine Act operates as a complete bar to plaintiff’s claim because her injuries were caused by one of the inherent risks of equine activities as defined in the statute.
The Equine Act operates as a complete bar to plaintiff’s claim because her injuries were caused by one of the inherent risks of equine activities as defined in the statute.
Abby Ryan, et al. v. Andrew Renny, M.D. (A-50-09)
Abby Ryan, et al. v. Andrew Renny, M.D. (A-50-09)7-22-10
Based on the plain language of the Affidavit of Merit
statute, plaintiff Abby Ryan satisfied the good faith standard of the statute’s waiver provision, which permits a non-board-certified physician to certify that the actions of a board-certified specialist did not meet the required standard of care.
Based on the plain language of the Affidavit of Merit
statute, plaintiff Abby Ryan satisfied the good faith standard of the statute’s waiver provision, which permits a non-board-certified physician to certify that the actions of a board-certified specialist did not meet the required standard of care.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
TAC Associates v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, et al. (A-57-09)
TAC Associates v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, et al. (A-57-09) 7-15-10
Under the Brownfield and Contaminated Site Remediation
Act, an applicant for an Innocent Party Grant to
defray the cost of remediating a contaminated property
must own the property at the time it submits the
application. Because plaintiff TAC Associates no
longer owned the property when it applied for the
grant, it was ineligible.
Under the Brownfield and Contaminated Site Remediation
Act, an applicant for an Innocent Party Grant to
defray the cost of remediating a contaminated property
must own the property at the time it submits the
application. Because plaintiff TAC Associates no
longer owned the property when it applied for the
grant, it was ineligible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)